




by elven Princess4



Category: Lord of the Rings
Genre: Adventure, Romance
Language: English
Status: In-Progress
Published: 2003-03-01
Updated: 2003-03-05
Packaged: 2013-05-13 02:46:29
Rating: M
Chapters: 2
Words: 4,210
Publisher: www.fanfiction.net
Story URL: http://www.fanfiction.net/s/1254362/1/
Author URL: http://www.fanfiction.net/u/315037/elven-Princess4
Summary: the fellowship arrive at lothlorien and meet with a she- elf wich is the last person legolas wants to see. Will he be able to put up with her on the journey after she hurt him those many years ago? rated R cuz theres gonna be sex in later chapters.





	1. Default Chapter

Message: 1  
  
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:15:57 +0200  
  
From: "Helge K. Fauskanger" helge.fauskanger@nor.uib.no mailto:helge.fauskanger@nor.uib.no  
  
Subject: Vinyar Tengwar #42  
  
Vinyar Tengwar #42 does contain some material of interest and value, but  
  
this issue also demonstrates how difficult it would be to establish a  
  
"standard" version of Tolkien's languages. Our general ideal must be that  
  
we will adhere to Tolkien's final intentions, but some rather sketchy  
  
revisions alluded to in the post-LotR material are probably best ignored. I  
  
cannot fully discuss these problems here.  
  
When announcing it, the editor singled out the discussion of Eldarin  
  
numerals as a particularly interesting item in this issue. I had hoped we  
  
would finally have a word for "twelve" (Etym only provides the stem RASAT),  
  
and also learn how to count beyond twelve. However, there is no such  
  
information here. What we do get are lists of ordinal numbers for the three  
  
main Eldarin languages.  
  
Quenya (I don't regularize the spelling):  
  
1st: minya  
  
2nd: tatya "early [in Arda time] replaced by _attea_"  
  
3rd: nelya, "also" neldea  
  
4th: kantea  
  
5th: lempea, an analogical formation replacing older _lemenya_ or _lepenya_  
  
6th: enquea  
  
7th: otsea  
  
8th: toldea (changed by Tolkien from _toltea_; we must assume that he also  
  
changed the cardinal "8" from _tolto_ to *_toldo_, though both may stand as  
  
valid variants)  
  
9th: nertea  
  
10th: quainea  
  
The word for "10th" clearly presupposes another word for "ten" than  
  
_kainen_ given in the Etymologies. The word _quainea_ is meant to be  
  
related to the words for "full" (Q _quanta_): Ten would be the "full"  
  
number of fingers. (This buries the bizarre idea that the Tolkien's Elves  
  
must have had twelve fingers because they counted in twelves!)  
  
The forms _lempea_ "5th" and _enquea_ "6th" had actually been foreseen; I  
  
used them in my translation of the first chapter of the Bible (published on  
  
my site several years ago). However, there I used _canya_ (not _cantea_)  
  
for "4th".  
  
Telerin is represented as consistently using the ending _-ya_:  
  
1st: minya  
  
2nd: tatya  
  
3rd: nelya  
  
4th: canatya  
  
5th: lepenya  
  
6th: enetya  
  
7th: ototya (said to be analogical for *_otosya_)  
  
8th: tolodya  
  
9th: neterya  
  
10th: paianya  
  
The Sindarin cardinals are listed as: 1 mi^n or e^r, 2 ta^d, 3 ne^l, 4  
  
canad, 5 leben, 6 eneg, 7 odog (the historically correct form should have  
  
been _odo_, and it was supposedly used in Doriathrin Sindarin, but a final  
  
G was otherwise imported from _eneg_), 8 tolodh, 9 neder, 10 pae. The only  
  
important revisions from the "Noldorin" of the Etymologies are these: 3 is  
  
now just _ne^l_ rather than _neled(h)_, 8 is now _tolodh_ rather than  
  
_toloth_, and 10 is _pae_ rather than _caer_.  
  
The Sindarin ordinals are said to go like this:  
  
1st: _mein_, later pronounced _main_, only in the sense of "prime, chief,  
  
pre-eminent"; otherwise _minui_  
  
2nd: _taid_ only in the sense "supporting, second in command" etc.,  
  
otherwise _tadui_  
  
3rd: _neil_, later pronounced _nail_; "late" Sindarin also has _nelui_  
  
4th: canthui (sic!)  
  
5th: levnui  
  
6th: enchui (sic again; Tolkien rejected the form _enegui_)  
  
7th: othui  
  
8th: tollui [as late as in the King's Letter, it was _tolothen_ instead!]  
  
9th: nedui  
  
10th: paenui  
  
The forms _canthui_ and _enchui_ are rather unexpected, considering what we  
  
thought we knew about Sindarin. In this late-sixties document, Tolkien  
  
explicitly insists that in the dialect of Sindarin used by the Noldor,  
  
primitive _nk_ and _nt_ had become _nch_ and _nth_ between vowels! Pardon  
  
my exclamation mark, but this is actually a pretty drastic change. If we  
  
are to implement this system on the earlier material, we shall have to  
  
carry out some pretty ruthless and drastic "regularizing"! In the  
  
Etymologies, Tolkien has _nt_ becoming _nn_ between vowels; for instance,  
  
Quenya _anta-_ "to give" corresponds to _anno_ in the Welsh-sounding Elvish  
  
language (Noldorin Sindarin). Must this now be emended to *_antho_? Or  
  
should we rather ignore the change, and silently alter _canthui_ as a word  
  
for "4th" to *_cannui_?  
  
As for the ordinal "twelve", we are only given a stem _yunuk(w)_. The  
  
editor theorizes that the actual Quenya word would be *_yunque_, but it is  
  
not explicitly given. We may almost just as well keep using *_rasta_, I'd  
  
say.  
  
In all of VT42, it is Bill Welden's brief article about "Negation in  
  
Quenya" (pp. 32-34) that provides the most useful information for writers.  
  
The article is mainly concerned with demonstrating how far-reaching and  
  
unpredictable Tolkien's frequent revisions really are: The word _laa_,  
  
which had been a word for "no" in the Etymologies of the mid-thirties, had  
  
come to mean "yes" around 1960 -- but around 1970 it had regained its  
  
original negative meaning.  
  
Some Quenya sentences are cited from Tolkien's manuscripts, involving a  
  
verb "judge" that varies between _nav-_ and _ham-_:  
  
_La navin karitalya(s) maara_, literally "I don't judge your doing (it)  
  
good" = "I do not advise you to do so". My analysis: _la_ unstressed  
  
variant of _laa_ "no, not"; _navin_ "I judge" (1st person aorist),  
  
_karita-lya-s_ "doing-your-it", _maara_ "good".  
  
_Laa karita i hamil maara alasaila (naa)_, "not to do what you judge good  
  
(would be) unwise". My analysis: _Laa_ stressed negation "not" (when  
  
unstressed it becomes _la_, as above), _karita_ "to do" (the verb _kar-_  
  
"make, do" with the ending _-i_ and the extension _-ta_ associated with the  
  
infinitive), _i_ "what" in the sense of "that which" (_i_ being used as a  
  
relative pronoun here), _hamil_ "you judge" (2nd person aorist), _maara_  
  
"good", _alasaila_ "unwise", _naa_ "is". This use of _i_ is interesting (I  
  
might have expected _ya_, and perhaps that would be equally permissible).  
  
The word _hamil_ confirms _-l_ as a shorter form of the ending _-lye_  
  
"you"; this variation would parallel the 1st person variation between _-n_  
  
and _-nye_ as endings for "I". The shorter ending may be the commonest in  
  
both cases.  
  
As for _naa_ here being translated "would be" rather than "is" (the actual  
  
meaning of the word), Tolkien wrote: "English normally says 'would be'  
  
because the whole expression is equivalent to 'if you think this action  
  
right, it would be unwise not to take it' and because it is plainly a piece  
  
of advice that will be acted on, or not, in the future. If this uncertainty  
  
is emphasized Quenya can say _nauva_ 'will be'."  
  
So at last we have one more form of the verb "to be": the future tense  
  
_nauva_ (not a surprising form per se -- I would have put my money on  
  
either this or _naava_). Writers can finally let the _yeeva_ of Fiiriel's  
  
Song rest in peace. If we wait five more years or so, perhaps we can  
  
actually have the past tense "was" and the infinitive "to be" as well?  
  
Further sentences quoted in Welden's article:  
  
_Laa karitas, navin, alasaila naa_ "not doing it, I deem, would be  
  
[literally "is"] unwise."  
  
_Laa karitas alasaila kee nauva_, not directly translated but plainly  
  
meaning "not doing it will be unwise" if we disregard the particle _kee_,  
  
which according to Welden's annotation indicates uncertainty (in Welden's  
  
note, the word is cited as _ke_ with a short vowel instead, and no  
  
explanation is given for the discrepancy). Taking this particle into  
  
account, the whole sentence would mean "not doing it may be unwise" or "not  
  
doing it will perhaps be unwise". Indeed it seems that we can think of _ke_  
  
or _kee_ as a word for "perhaps". Welden also reports that "elsewhere in  
  
this document it was corrected" to _kwii_ or _kwiita_. The spelling is most  
  
unusual for Quenya; we would expect _qu_ for _kw_.  
  
_Alasaila naa laa kare tai mo nave (or, navilwe) maara_, "it is unwise not  
  
to do what one judges (or, we judge) good". My analysis: _alasaila_  
  
"unwise", _naa_ "is", _laa_ "not", _kare_ "to do". The word _tai_ is here  
  
translated "what", but I guess it is literally a plural form of _ta_ "that,  
  
it" (mentioned in Etym, entry TA); hence: "it is unwise not to do THOSE  
  
[things] that one judges good". The word _te_ "them" occurring in LotR  
  
could be the unstressed form of _tai_. Either that, or the transcriber has  
  
telescoped *_ta i_ "that which" in Tolkien's manuscript into one word (or,  
  
if the transcription is correct, _ta i_ could actually be drawn together  
  
into one syllable _tai_). As for _mo_, Welden cites a note by Tolkien where  
  
this is explained as an "indefinite personal pronoun 'somebody, one'"  
  
(apparently related to the agental/personal ending -mo, as in _ciryamo_  
  
"ship-person" = "mariner"). A "neuter personal pronoun" _ma_ "something, a  
  
thing" is also mentioned. The phrase _mo nave_ is translated "one judges"  
  
(the verb being an aorist), but as an alternative Tolkien mentioned  
  
_navilwe_, "we judge", another aorist with a hitherto unattested pronominal  
  
ending _-lwe_ "we". The final _maara_ "good" follows.  
  
The ending _-lwe_ is quite interesting, unless it is simply a misreading  
  
for _-lme_. This form occurs in LotR, in the Cormallen Praise (_andave  
  
laituvaLMEt_, "long shall WE praise them"). Since this pronoun had occurred  
  
in LotR, Tolkien would presumably consider it a fixed part of his mythos,  
  
and if _-lwe_ occurs in a post-LotR source, it must somehow be compatible  
  
with _-lme_. Indeed _-lwe_ looks just like the suffix some of us have  
  
extrapolated as the ending for dual inclusive "we", that is, "we" meaning  
  
"the two of us". (The ending _-lme_ is a PLURAL inclusive "we", meaning  
  
"all of us" instead.) Perhaps Tolkien would use a dual form in a sentence  
  
like "it is unwise not to do what we judge good", if this is two people  
  
talking together?  
  
A dual ending _-lwe_ "we" would correspond to a pronominal possessive  
  
ending *_-lwa_ "our". It may be that it is this ending which occurs in the  
  
word _omentielvo_ "of our meeting", the _w_ becoming _v_ before the  
  
genitive ending -o because _wo_ is an impossible Quenya combination (we  
  
can't have **_omentielwo_).  
  
A little syntax regarding the verb "to be" can be extracted from the Quenya  
  
sentences above. The verb _ná_ often seems to _follow_ the word its  
  
counterpart "is" would precede in English: _Laa karitas, navin, alasaila  
  
naa_, literally "not doing it, I deem, unwise is" (rather than _...naa  
  
alasaila_). Cf. also _vanwa naa_ "lost is [Valimar]" in Namaarie. Perhaps,  
  
then, "the maiden is beautiful" would be _i vende vanya naa_ rather than _i  
  
vende naa vanya_.  
  
Yet both may be permissible. Welden cites the formula "A naa calima laa B"  
  
for "A is brighter than B" -- literally, "A is brighter beyond B". This is  
  
apparently a direct quote from a Tolkien manuscript; notice that the word  
  
order is not *"A calima naa laa B" -- though that would perhaps be  
  
permissible as well.  
  
The word _laa_ "beyond" here occurring is unrelated to the similar-sounding  
  
negation "not". We are told that the word _epe_ "after" can also fill this  
  
function (this is not entirely clear -- since we are so lucky that Welden  
  
is with us now, may he be so kind as to confirm that _A naa calima epe B_  
  
would be correct Quenya for "A is brighter than B"?) This _epe_ is our  
  
first independent attestation of a word for "after", though the variant  
  
_apa_ is attested in compounds (like _Apanoonar_ "Afterborn", an Elvish  
  
term for humans).  
  
- HF 


	2. unpleasant meetings

Message: 1  
  
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:15:57 +0200  
  
From: "Helge K. Fauskanger" helge.fauskanger@nor.uib.no mailto:helge.fauskanger@nor.uib.no  
  
Subject: Vinyar Tengwar #42  
  
Vinyar Tengwar #42 does contain some material of interest and value, but  
  
this issue also demonstrates how difficult it would be to establish a  
  
"standard" version of Tolkien's languages. Our general ideal must be that  
  
we will adhere to Tolkien's final intentions, but some rather sketchy  
  
revisions alluded to in the post-LotR material are probably best ignored. I  
  
cannot fully discuss these problems here.  
  
When announcing it, the editor singled out the discussion of Eldarin  
  
numerals as a particularly interesting item in this issue. I had hoped we  
  
would finally have a word for "twelve" (Etym only provides the stem RASAT),  
  
and also learn how to count beyond twelve. However, there is no such  
  
information here. What we do get are lists of ordinal numbers for the three  
  
main Eldarin languages.  
  
Quenya (I don't regularize the spelling):  
  
1st: minya  
  
2nd: tatya "early [in Arda time] replaced by _attea_"  
  
3rd: nelya, "also" neldea  
  
4th: kantea  
  
5th: lempea, an analogical formation replacing older _lemenya_ or _lepenya_  
  
6th: enquea  
  
7th: otsea  
  
8th: toldea (changed by Tolkien from _toltea_; we must assume that he also  
  
changed the cardinal "8" from _tolto_ to *_toldo_, though both may stand as  
  
valid variants)  
  
9th: nertea  
  
10th: quainea  
  
The word for "10th" clearly presupposes another word for "ten" than  
  
_kainen_ given in the Etymologies. The word _quainea_ is meant to be  
  
related to the words for "full" (Q _quanta_): Ten would be the "full"  
  
number of fingers. (This buries the bizarre idea that the Tolkien's Elves  
  
must have had twelve fingers because they counted in twelves!)  
  
The forms _lempea_ "5th" and _enquea_ "6th" had actually been foreseen; I  
  
used them in my translation of the first chapter of the Bible (published on  
  
my site several years ago). However, there I used _canya_ (not _cantea_)  
  
for "4th".  
  
Telerin is represented as consistently using the ending _-ya_:  
  
1st: minya  
  
2nd: tatya  
  
3rd: nelya  
  
4th: canatya  
  
5th: lepenya  
  
6th: enetya  
  
7th: ototya (said to be analogical for *_otosya_)  
  
8th: tolodya  
  
9th: neterya  
  
10th: paianya  
  
The Sindarin cardinals are listed as: 1 mi^n or e^r, 2 ta^d, 3 ne^l, 4  
  
canad, 5 leben, 6 eneg, 7 odog (the historically correct form should have  
  
been _odo_, and it was supposedly used in Doriathrin Sindarin, but a final  
  
G was otherwise imported from _eneg_), 8 tolodh, 9 neder, 10 pae. The only  
  
important revisions from the "Noldorin" of the Etymologies are these: 3 is  
  
now just _ne^l_ rather than _neled(h)_, 8 is now _tolodh_ rather than  
  
_toloth_, and 10 is _pae_ rather than _caer_.  
  
The Sindarin ordinals are said to go like this:  
  
1st: _mein_, later pronounced _main_, only in the sense of "prime, chief,  
  
pre-eminent"; otherwise _minui_  
  
2nd: _taid_ only in the sense "supporting, second in command" etc.,  
  
otherwise _tadui_  
  
3rd: _neil_, later pronounced _nail_; "late" Sindarin also has _nelui_  
  
4th: canthui (sic!)  
  
5th: levnui  
  
6th: enchui (sic again; Tolkien rejected the form _enegui_)  
  
7th: othui  
  
8th: tollui [as late as in the King's Letter, it was _tolothen_ instead!]  
  
9th: nedui  
  
10th: paenui  
  
The forms _canthui_ and _enchui_ are rather unexpected, considering what we  
  
thought we knew about Sindarin. In this late-sixties document, Tolkien  
  
explicitly insists that in the dialect of Sindarin used by the Noldor,  
  
primitive _nk_ and _nt_ had become _nch_ and _nth_ between vowels! Pardon  
  
my exclamation mark, but this is actually a pretty drastic change. If we  
  
are to implement this system on the earlier material, we shall have to  
  
carry out some pretty ruthless and drastic "regularizing"! In the  
  
Etymologies, Tolkien has _nt_ becoming _nn_ between vowels; for instance,  
  
Quenya _anta-_ "to give" corresponds to _anno_ in the Welsh-sounding Elvish  
  
language (Noldorin Sindarin). Must this now be emended to *_antho_? Or  
  
should we rather ignore the change, and silently alter _canthui_ as a word  
  
for "4th" to *_cannui_?  
  
As for the ordinal "twelve", we are only given a stem _yunuk(w)_. The  
  
editor theorizes that the actual Quenya word would be *_yunque_, but it is  
  
not explicitly given. We may almost just as well keep using *_rasta_, I'd  
  
say.  
  
In all of VT42, it is Bill Welden's brief article about "Negation in  
  
Quenya" (pp. 32-34) that provides the most useful information for writers.  
  
The article is mainly concerned with demonstrating how far-reaching and  
  
unpredictable Tolkien's frequent revisions really are: The word _laa_,  
  
which had been a word for "no" in the Etymologies of the mid-thirties, had  
  
come to mean "yes" around 1960 -- but around 1970 it had regained its  
  
original negative meaning.  
  
Some Quenya sentences are cited from Tolkien's manuscripts, involving a  
  
verb "judge" that varies between _nav-_ and _ham-_:  
  
_La navin karitalya(s) maara_, literally "I don't judge your doing (it)  
  
good" = "I do not advise you to do so". My analysis: _la_ unstressed  
  
variant of _laa_ "no, not"; _navin_ "I judge" (1st person aorist),  
  
_karita-lya-s_ "doing-your-it", _maara_ "good".  
  
_Laa karita i hamil maara alasaila (naa)_, "not to do what you judge good  
  
(would be) unwise". My analysis: _Laa_ stressed negation "not" (when  
  
unstressed it becomes _la_, as above), _karita_ "to do" (the verb _kar-_  
  
"make, do" with the ending _-i_ and the extension _-ta_ associated with the  
  
infinitive), _i_ "what" in the sense of "that which" (_i_ being used as a  
  
relative pronoun here), _hamil_ "you judge" (2nd person aorist), _maara_  
  
"good", _alasaila_ "unwise", _naa_ "is". This use of _i_ is interesting (I  
  
might have expected _ya_, and perhaps that would be equally permissible).  
  
The word _hamil_ confirms _-l_ as a shorter form of the ending _-lye_  
  
"you"; this variation would parallel the 1st person variation between _-n_  
  
and _-nye_ as endings for "I". The shorter ending may be the commonest in  
  
both cases.  
  
As for _naa_ here being translated "would be" rather than "is" (the actual  
  
meaning of the word), Tolkien wrote: "English normally says 'would be'  
  
because the whole expression is equivalent to 'if you think this action  
  
right, it would be unwise not to take it' and because it is plainly a piece  
  
of advice that will be acted on, or not, in the future. If this uncertainty  
  
is emphasized Quenya can say _nauva_ 'will be'."  
  
So at last we have one more form of the verb "to be": the future tense  
  
_nauva_ (not a surprising form per se -- I would have put my money on  
  
either this or _naava_). Writers can finally let the _yeeva_ of Fiiriel's  
  
Song rest in peace. If we wait five more years or so, perhaps we can  
  
actually have the past tense "was" and the infinitive "to be" as well?  
  
Further sentences quoted in Welden's article:  
  
_Laa karitas, navin, alasaila naa_ "not doing it, I deem, would be  
  
[literally "is"] unwise."  
  
_Laa karitas alasaila kee nauva_, not directly translated but plainly  
  
meaning "not doing it will be unwise" if we disregard the particle _kee_,  
  
which according to Welden's annotation indicates uncertainty (in Welden's  
  
note, the word is cited as _ke_ with a short vowel instead, and no  
  
explanation is given for the discrepancy). Taking this particle into  
  
account, the whole sentence would mean "not doing it may be unwise" or "not  
  
doing it will perhaps be unwise". Indeed it seems that we can think of _ke_  
  
or _kee_ as a word for "perhaps". Welden also reports that "elsewhere in  
  
this document it was corrected" to _kwii_ or _kwiita_. The spelling is most  
  
unusual for Quenya; we would expect _qu_ for _kw_.  
  
_Alasaila naa laa kare tai mo nave (or, navilwe) maara_, "it is unwise not  
  
to do what one judges (or, we judge) good". My analysis: _alasaila_  
  
"unwise", _naa_ "is", _laa_ "not", _kare_ "to do". The word _tai_ is here  
  
translated "what", but I guess it is literally a plural form of _ta_ "that,  
  
it" (mentioned in Etym, entry TA); hence: "it is unwise not to do THOSE  
  
[things] that one judges good". The word _te_ "them" occurring in LotR  
  
could be the unstressed form of _tai_. Either that, or the transcriber has  
  
telescoped *_ta i_ "that which" in Tolkien's manuscript into one word (or,  
  
if the transcription is correct, _ta i_ could actually be drawn together  
  
into one syllable _tai_). As for _mo_, Welden cites a note by Tolkien where  
  
this is explained as an "indefinite personal pronoun 'somebody, one'"  
  
(apparently related to the agental/personal ending -mo, as in _ciryamo_  
  
"ship-person" = "mariner"). A "neuter personal pronoun" _ma_ "something, a  
  
thing" is also mentioned. The phrase _mo nave_ is translated "one judges"  
  
(the verb being an aorist), but as an alternative Tolkien mentioned  
  
_navilwe_, "we judge", another aorist with a hitherto unattested pronominal  
  
ending _-lwe_ "we". The final _maara_ "good" follows.  
  
The ending _-lwe_ is quite interesting, unless it is simply a misreading  
  
for _-lme_. This form occurs in LotR, in the Cormallen Praise (_andave  
  
laituvaLMEt_, "long shall WE praise them"). Since this pronoun had occurred  
  
in LotR, Tolkien would presumably consider it a fixed part of his mythos,  
  
and if _-lwe_ occurs in a post-LotR source, it must somehow be compatible  
  
with _-lme_. Indeed _-lwe_ looks just like the suffix some of us have  
  
extrapolated as the ending for dual inclusive "we", that is, "we" meaning  
  
"the two of us". (The ending _-lme_ is a PLURAL inclusive "we", meaning  
  
"all of us" instead.) Perhaps Tolkien would use a dual form in a sentence  
  
like "it is unwise not to do what we judge good", if this is two people  
  
talking together?  
  
A dual ending _-lwe_ "we" would correspond to a pronominal possessive  
  
ending *_-lwa_ "our". It may be that it is this ending which occurs in the  
  
word _omentielvo_ "of our meeting", the _w_ becoming _v_ before the  
  
genitive ending -o because _wo_ is an impossible Quenya combination (we  
  
can't have **_omentielwo_).  
  
A little syntax regarding the verb "to be" can be extracted from the Quenya  
  
sentences above. The verb _ná_ often seems to _follow_ the word its  
  
counterpart "is" would precede in English: _Laa karitas, navin, alasaila  
  
naa_, literally "not doing it, I deem, unwise is" (rather than _...naa  
  
alasaila_). Cf. also _vanwa naa_ "lost is [Valimar]" in Namaarie. Perhaps,  
  
then, "the maiden is beautiful" would be _i vende vanya naa_ rather than _i  
  
vende naa vanya_.  
  
Yet both may be permissible. Welden cites the formula "A naa calima laa B"  
  
for "A is brighter than B" -- literally, "A is brighter beyond B". This is  
  
apparently a direct quote from a Tolkien manuscript; notice that the word  
  
order is not *"A calima naa laa B" -- though that would perhaps be  
  
permissible as well.  
  
The word _laa_ "beyond" here occurring is unrelated to the similar-sounding  
  
negation "not". We are told that the word _epe_ "after" can also fill this  
  
function (this is not entirely clear -- since we are so lucky that Welden  
  
is with us now, may he be so kind as to confirm that _A naa calima epe B_  
  
would be correct Quenya for "A is brighter than B"?) This _epe_ is our  
  
first independent attestation of a word for "after", though the variant  
  
_apa_ is attested in compounds (like _Apanoonar_ "Afterborn", an Elvish  
  
term for humans).  
  
- HF 


End file.
